As well as being compared against other travel zooms, the Olympus SP-620 UZ is also often compared to ultra compacts, super zooms, pro DSLRs, pro digicams and compacts. The Olympus SP-620 UZ's top rivals come from Nikon (such as the Coolpix S500 and the Coolpix L320) and Olympus (such as the SZ-20 and the SP-570 UZ)

compared toTravel zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Olympus 620 UZ compared to other travel zoom competitors include: it has slightly more zoom (21x vs 12.5x) and is newer (january 2012 vs january 2011).

However, on average it doesn't have a built-in GPS, has a slightly lower resolution screen (230k dots vs 460k dots), is significantly larger (mid size (106×69×40 mm) vs compact (102×64×30 mm)), has a CCD-family sensor (CCD vs CMOS) and is thicker (1.6" vs 1.2").

Olympus SZ-20

Olympus SZ-20
10 months older

Significant advantages of the SZ-20 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Has a CMOS-family sensor: CMOS vs CCD
  • Significantly smaller: Compact (102×64×30 mm) vs Mid size (106×69×40 mm)
  • Much lighter: 206 g vs 435 g

Significant disadvantages of the SZ-20 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • None found

common strengths of the SZ-20 and 620 UZ

  • None found

Fujifilm FinePix F550 EXR

Fujifilm FinePix F550 EXR
1 year older

Significant advantages of the F550 EXR (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Has a GPS
  • Has a CMOS-family sensor: CMOS vs CCD
  • Significantly smaller: Compact (104×64×33 mm) vs Mid size (106×69×40 mm)

Significant disadvantages of the F550 EXR (vs the 620 UZ)

  • None found

common strengths of the F550 EXR and 620 UZ

  • None found

compared toUltra compact competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Olympus 620 UZ compared to ultra compact competitors include: it has significantly more zoom (21x vs 3x), has a much wider wide angle lens (25 mm vs 35 mm), has a slightly larger screen (3" vs 2.5"), takes slightly higher resolution photos (9.7 MP vs 7.1 MP) and is newer (january 2012 vs february 2007).

However, on average it is much larger (mid size (106×69×40 mm) vs ultra compact (88×51×22 mm)), has worse image stabilization (sensor shift vs lens), is thicker (1.6" vs 0.9") and is much heavier (435 g vs 165 g).

Nikon Coolpix S500

Nikon Coolpix S500
4 years older

Significant advantages of the S500 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the S500 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • None found

common strengths of the S500 and 620 UZ

  • None found

compared toSuper zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Olympus 620 UZ compared to super zoom competitors include: it is slightly smaller (mid size (106×69×40 mm) vs prosumer size (118×81×100 mm)), is newer (january 2012 vs january 2008) and is thinner (1.6" vs 3.9").

However, on average it has worse image stabilization (sensor shift vs lens), doesn't have a viewfinder (none vs digital), doesn't support an external flash and has a slower max shutter speed (1/1500 of a second vs 1/4000 of a second).

Olympus SP-570 UZ

Olympus SP-570 UZ
4 years older

Significant advantages of the SP-570 UZ (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Better image stabilization:
    1. Lens
    vs
    1. Sensor shift
  • Supports an external flash
  • Has a viewfinder: Digital vs None

Significant disadvantages of the SP-570 UZ (vs the 620 UZ)

  • None found

common strengths of the SP-570 UZ and 620 UZ

  • Very small: Prosumer size (116×79×78 mm) vs Mid size (106×69×40 mm)
  • Thin: 3.1" vs 1.6"
  • Very light: 405 g vs 435 g

Nikon Coolpix L320

Nikon Coolpix L320
1 year newer
$353

Significant advantages of the L320 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Significantly better wide angle: 22 mm vs 25 mm

Significant disadvantages of the L320 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Thicker: 3.3" vs 1.6"

common strengths of the L320 and 620 UZ

  • Very small: Prosumer size (111×76×83 mm) vs Mid size (106×69×40 mm)
  • Thin: 3.3" vs 1.6"
  • Very light: 430 g vs 435 g

Fujifilm FinePix S3300

Fujifilm FinePix S3300
10 months older

Significant advantages of the S3300 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Has a viewfinder: Digital vs None
  • Faster max shutter speed: 1/2000 of a second vs 1/1500 of a second

Significant disadvantages of the S3300 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Significantly thicker: 3.9" vs 1.6"

common strengths of the S3300 and 620 UZ

  • Fairly small: Prosumer size (118×81×100 mm) vs Mid size (106×69×40 mm)
  • Thin: 3.9" vs 1.6"
  • Light weight: 540 g vs 435 g

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H9

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H9
4 years older

Significant advantages of the DSC-H9 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Has a flip-out screen
  • Better image stabilization:
    1. Lens
    vs
    1. Sensor shift
  • Has a viewfinder: Digital vs None

Significant disadvantages of the DSC-H9 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Much worse wide angle: 31 mm vs 25 mm
  • Thicker: 3.4" vs 1.6"

common strengths of the DSC-H9 and 620 UZ

  • Fairly small: Prosumer size (110×83×86 mm) vs Mid size (106×69×40 mm)
  • Thin: 3.4" vs 1.6"
  • Very light: 440 g vs 435 g

compared toPro DSLR competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Olympus 620 UZ compared to pro DSLR competitors include: it records lower quality movies (720p @ 30fps vs none), has a much larger screen (3" vs 2.5"), has image stabilization (sensor shift vs none), is newer (january 2012 vs july 2007) and is much smaller (mid size (106×69×40 mm) vs professional size (147×113×74 mm)).

However, on average it takes slightly lower resolution photos (9.7 MP vs 12.1 MP), has a slightly smaller sensor (1/2.3" 6.17x4.55mm vs APS-C 23x15.5mm), doesn't have a viewfinder (none vs pentaprism), has a built-in lens and doesn't support an external flash.

Fujifilm FinePix IS Pro

Fujifilm FinePix IS Pro
4 years older

Significant advantages of the IS Pro (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Has a viewfinder: Pentaprism vs None
  • Has interchangeable lenses
  • Supports an external flash

Significant disadvantages of the IS Pro (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Much smaller screen: 2.5" vs 3"
  • Much thicker: 2.9" vs 1.6"
  • Much larger: Professional size (147×113×74 mm) vs Mid size (106×69×40 mm)

common strengths of the IS Pro and 620 UZ

  • Thin: 2.9" vs 1.6"
  • Built-in flashes

compared toPro digicam competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Olympus 620 UZ compared to pro digicam competitors include: it has significantly more zoom (21x vs 3x) and is newer (january 2012 vs february 2010).

However, on average it has a significantly narrower aperture (f/3.1 vs f/1.8), has a much lower resolution screen (230k dots vs 920k dots), is significantly larger (mid size (106×69×40 mm) vs compact (114×63×29 mm)), has worse image stabilization (sensor shift vs lens) and doesn't have a screen which flips out.

Samsung TL500

Samsung TL500
1 year older
$527

Significant advantages of the TL500 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Significantly wider aperture: f/1.8 vs f/3.1
  • Has an OLED screen: OLED vs LCD
  • Much higher resolution screen: 920k dots vs 230k dots

Significant disadvantages of the TL500 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • None found

common strengths of the TL500 and 620 UZ

  • None found

compared toCompact competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Olympus 620 UZ compared to compact competitors include: it has significantly more zoom (21x vs 3x), has a much wider wide angle lens (25 mm vs 38 mm), has a significantly larger screen (3" vs 1.8"), has image stabilization (sensor shift vs none) and takes slightly higher resolution photos (9.7 MP vs 3.9 MP).

However, on average it is significantly larger (mid size (106×69×40 mm) vs compact (93×60×28 mm)), is thicker (1.6" vs 1.1"), is much heavier (435 g vs 168 g), has a slower max shutter speed (1/1500 of a second vs 1/2000 of a second) and slightly shorter exposures (4 seconds vs 15 seconds).

Fujifilm FinePix AV255

Fujifilm FinePix AV255
1 year older

Significant advantages of the AV255 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Much smaller: Compact (93×60×28 mm) vs Mid size (106×69×40 mm)
  • Much lighter: 168 g vs 435 g
  • Much thinner: 1.1" vs 1.6"

Significant disadvantages of the AV255 (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Much worse wide angle: 32 mm vs 25 mm
  • No image stabilization: None vs
    1. Sensor shift

common strengths of the AV255 and 620 UZ

  • Each has a built-in flash

Olympus D-545 Zoom

Placeholder
6 years older

Significant advantages of the D-545 Zoom (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Significantly smaller: Compact (106×56×36 mm) vs Mid size (106×69×40 mm)
  • Much lighter: 190 g vs 435 g
  • Significantly faster max shutter speed: 1/2000 of a second vs 1/1500 of a second

Significant disadvantages of the D-545 Zoom (vs the 620 UZ)

  • Much worse wide angle: 38 mm vs 25 mm
  • No image stabilization: None vs
    1. Sensor shift
  • Much smaller screen: 1.8" vs 3"

common strengths of the D-545 Zoom and 620 UZ

  • Each has a built-in flash